The following is an excerpt from Practice Perspectives: Vault's Guide to Legal Practice Areas.

Ben K. Shiroma represents both plaintiffs and defendants in high-stakes intellectual property (IP) disputes with a focus on patent and trade secret litigation. Ben has been part of multiple jury trial teams and has also assisted with client matters before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He advises clients in disputes involving medical devices, computing, and electronics, as well as copyright and trademark litigation matters. Ben is an active bar member, serves on the board of the Los Angeles Intellectual Property Association, and is a member of the Association of Business Trial Lawyers. He earned his B.S. in electrical engineering summa cum laude from the University of Southern California and his J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School, where he served as an editor of the Journal of Law and Technology.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

At its core, my role as an IP litigator is a storyteller. Whether my team is presenting a closing argument to a jury or writing a brief, I always strive to tell a compelling story of why my client should prevail from a legal perspective and to ensure fundamental fairness.

One of the most interesting things about being a litigator is that, on a day-to-day basis and on a case-by-case basis, what is required to accomplish the goal varies. You start a case by learning as much as you can about your client, their story, and their technology. As the case progresses, you sharpen your understanding of the technology as well as the key legal issues, eventually becoming an expert on both. Then, as a case nears summary judgment or trial, you fit the facts into the relevant legal framework in as compelling of a way as you can.

What types of clients do you represent?

I represent clients primarily in the medical device and electronics fields. My clients range from Fortune 500 companies to local businesses. Exemplary representations include Masimo, Amazon, Applied Medical Resources, Panasonic Avionics, Sigray, and Advanced Cluster Systems. Regardless of their size, however, I understand the importance of every case to my clients and treat their cases as if they were my own.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

I primarily represent clients in district court patent and trade secret litigations. I also assist with parallel litigations before the PTAB, which commonly arise in the context of district court litigation. A few representative matters from the past year include Masimo Corp. v. Apple, Inc. and Carl Zeiss X-Ray Microscopy, Inc. v. Sigray, Inc.

How did you choose this practice area?

I decided to be a patent and trade secret litigator because I thoroughly enjoy both the technical aspects of my cases as well as the litigation process. After attending law school, I knew I wanted to be a litigator. In addition, as someone with a background in electrical engineering, patent and trade secret litigation was a way to stay connected with the technical world while still practicing as a litigator.

What is a “typical” day like and/or what are some common tasks you perform?

One of my favorite parts of my job as a litigator is that my day-to-day changes constantly and no two days are exactly alike. Litigation is a long and varied process. I spend some days with my clients, learning their backgrounds and how they found themselves in litigation. I spend other days discussing my clients’ technologies with leading experts to better understand what a patent term may mean and why my clients’ technologies do or do not meet the claims of an asserted patent. I spend other days resolving discovery disputes with opposing counsel. Finally, if a case gets that far, some of my days (and nights) are spent preparing for trial with my team.

What training, classes, experience, or skills development would you recommend to someone who wishes to enter your practice area?

My main advice to anyone who wants to become a patent or trade secret litigator is to take as many IP classes as possible in law school, including Trademark and Copyright Law. Knowing the specialized terminology and doctrinal frameworks will allow you to hit the ground running during your summer associateship or first year. Although your real cases will surely raise issues beyond what you read in law school, having a strong subject matter baseline will allow you to begin thinking about finer points faster than you would be able to do if you were simultaneously trying to learn the basics.

What is the most challenging aspect of practicing in this area?

A particularly challenging and engaging area of patent and trade secret litigation is damages. For some other areas of law, damages analysis might consist solely of business or economic analysis. Not so for patent and trade secret law. For patent infringement claims, damages are required to be tied to the value of the claimed invention itself and are sometimes closely tied to the technical analysis. Therefore, effective damages analysis requires one to be familiar with relevant technical, economic, and legal principles. This makes damages one of the most challenging and rewarding areas of patent and trade secret law.

What is unique about your practice area at your firm?

One of the unique things about Knobbe Martens’ patent and trade secret litigation practice group is its incredibly deep bench of experienced litigators. Knobbe Martens is an IP-focused law firm. Accordingly, Knobbe Martens’ patent and trade secret litigation practice has tried dozens of patent and trade secret trials over the span of decades. Because of this, it is likely that one or more of our litigators have firsthand experience with any given IP law issue you might encounter in a case. I am lucky and privileged to work with such a knowledgeable and talented practice group, and I learn something new from them every day.

What kinds of experiences can summer associates gain in this practice area at your firm?

In Knobbe Martens’ summer program, summer associates frequently assist with real legal or factual research projects related to ongoing matters under the supervision of an associate and partner. This allows summer associates to get a sense of what litigation is like and whether they are interested in litigation long-term. Some summer associate projects can even include drafting portions of briefs or other submissions.

Just as valuably, summer associates are encouraged to work on patent or trademark prosecution projects as well. By being exposed to both the process of acquiring IP as well as litigating over it, summer associates are given a broader picture of how IP fits into clients’ overall business strategies.

Knobbe Martens similarly allows junior associates to maintain both litigation and prosecution dockets while they explore the direction they want to take their career.

What advice do you have for lawyers without technical or science backgrounds who want to practice in IP?

Do not be afraid of the technology and do not be afraid to get your hands dirty and dig in. Patented inventions are generally novel and non-obvious. Trade secrets are usually not generally known. The technology at issue in a case generally is not what even attorneys with technical backgrounds studied in college or graduate school. Even people with technical backgrounds need to learn the technology in a case. It might take more work on your part to learn the technology, but it is certainly possible. In fact, your process of internalization and learning the technology may even be an asset. Jurors rarely have technical backgrounds let alone in the relevant field. You may be better suited than someone with a technical background to know what facts need to be broken down and taught more expressly to a jury.